A good challenging question. This is one of the question during the test makes you completely sweaty

here is how I attack always such questions

The first is what: for sure not the conclusion so is or a Premise or X (something else) here is a premise in favour of the conclusion (notice is also true just before).

the second: is nont the conclusion but in somehow support the conclusion though i'm not quite sure if support completely the conclusion of the argument Consumers would tend to rely on the FDA’s general certification of safety............it seem something in the middle (notice IF) but for sure not against

Ok after this brief brainstorming in my mind I need a: P and a P (both in somehow are in favour of the conclusion but all things are fuzzy, unclear, I'm not pretty sure -------> this is what I would do during the test)

The choice is narrowed to C and E

E The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the stance that the advocate supports based on the first bold AND also on the whole context i do not see anything about a position. Here the advocate describe something that could happens if something else is not conducted

the second is that stance.

I do not see here a stance but instead a consideration (notice IF at the beginning of the bold)

For me is C therefore this one wins